Indeependent
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2013
- 73,633
- 28,506
- 2,250
I thought the MSM had too few viewers, even back then, to influence anything.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Iraq was lost because of the Mainstream Media ...
- Thread starter healthmyths
- Start date
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #22
Folks... I'm bringing to your obvious ignorance what our military thinks of the MSM!!!
Individuals and groups are actively working to have the U.S. lose in Iraq, while others would see an American defeat as helpful to their political interests or careers, according to retired U.S. combat pilot and former Air Force aide to U.S. president Bill Clinton, Lt. Colonel Robert "Buzz" Patterson, during an exclusive interview with International News Analysis Today.com
The lives of American soldiers are placed in greater peril, and the war in Iraq is prolonged unnecessarily, due to the distorted media reporting and partisan attacks by certain U.S. politicians, stated Patterson, author of Dereliction of Duty (2003) and Reckless Disregard (2004).
INA Today asked if the press is aiding the terrorism.
"Absolutely," Patterson responded.
Tying slanted media reporting to domestic politics, Patterson stated that, "Consciously or not, influential segments of the mainstream media advance the agenda that anything that besmirches the Bush administration is good, and if it comes at the expense of the war in Iraq - that's fine."
"The troops see that, they see that very clearly," Patterson observed.
Recently returned from visiting U.S. armed forces in Iraq, Patterson expressed to INA Today his concern about the media and political manipulation of the Iraq war. While troop morale remains high, U.S. military personnel are, nevertheless, dismayed at the image the established media convey to the American public regarding their efforts in Iraq.
Some troops believe that distorted media reporting is a greater threat to their personal safety than direct enemy attack, because the message the media give to the public encourages terror gangs to redouble their efforts, Patterson told INA Today.
Patterson noted that the troops are disturbed that positive developments, including the passage of an democratic Iraqi constitution - the first such event in that nation's 5,000 year history -- receive little attention, and are never permitted to disturb an otherwise dismal image painted by the established media journalists.
Al Qaeda carefully watches and reacts to U.S. public opinion, and considers media image an extremely important aspect of their military effort, Patterson told INA Today.
The use and manipulation of the established U.S. media has been a major tool of guerrilla efforts directed against America since the Vietnam war. Successful manipulation of the media is an essential part of any "peoples war," and there are reports that Vietnamese military and governmental authorities have passed along their experience in media-driven guerrilla warfare to Islamic terror groups.
The discussions with U.S. troops in Iraq, and his own research and observations form the substance of his latest book, War Crimes: The Left's Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror, due for release July 2006. "I am letting them [U.S. military personnel] tell their own story," Patterson stated.
Patterson said his book will challenge many Americans who are "unaware" or have difficulty believing that some elements in American society would favor U.S. losing in Iraq if it means political advantage.
During his interview with INA Today.com, Patterson cited continuing Democrat Party attacks on the Iraq war effort as an example of partisan politics endangering U.S. military personnel. Referring to leftist disputes over the launching of the U.S.-led attack on the Saddam Hussein regime, Patterson rhetorically asked, "What does it say to the troops when American politicians tell U.S. soldiers that they are there because of a ruse, that the whole thing was false from the get-go"?
MEDIA BIAS COSTS SOLDIERS' LIVES
PROOF the above is true??? WHERE WAS THE MSM in covering the above stories????
Individuals and groups are actively working to have the U.S. lose in Iraq, while others would see an American defeat as helpful to their political interests or careers, according to retired U.S. combat pilot and former Air Force aide to U.S. president Bill Clinton, Lt. Colonel Robert "Buzz" Patterson, during an exclusive interview with International News Analysis Today.com
The lives of American soldiers are placed in greater peril, and the war in Iraq is prolonged unnecessarily, due to the distorted media reporting and partisan attacks by certain U.S. politicians, stated Patterson, author of Dereliction of Duty (2003) and Reckless Disregard (2004).
INA Today asked if the press is aiding the terrorism.
"Absolutely," Patterson responded.
Tying slanted media reporting to domestic politics, Patterson stated that, "Consciously or not, influential segments of the mainstream media advance the agenda that anything that besmirches the Bush administration is good, and if it comes at the expense of the war in Iraq - that's fine."
"The troops see that, they see that very clearly," Patterson observed.
Recently returned from visiting U.S. armed forces in Iraq, Patterson expressed to INA Today his concern about the media and political manipulation of the Iraq war. While troop morale remains high, U.S. military personnel are, nevertheless, dismayed at the image the established media convey to the American public regarding their efforts in Iraq.
Some troops believe that distorted media reporting is a greater threat to their personal safety than direct enemy attack, because the message the media give to the public encourages terror gangs to redouble their efforts, Patterson told INA Today.
Patterson noted that the troops are disturbed that positive developments, including the passage of an democratic Iraqi constitution - the first such event in that nation's 5,000 year history -- receive little attention, and are never permitted to disturb an otherwise dismal image painted by the established media journalists.
Al Qaeda carefully watches and reacts to U.S. public opinion, and considers media image an extremely important aspect of their military effort, Patterson told INA Today.
The use and manipulation of the established U.S. media has been a major tool of guerrilla efforts directed against America since the Vietnam war. Successful manipulation of the media is an essential part of any "peoples war," and there are reports that Vietnamese military and governmental authorities have passed along their experience in media-driven guerrilla warfare to Islamic terror groups.
The discussions with U.S. troops in Iraq, and his own research and observations form the substance of his latest book, War Crimes: The Left's Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror, due for release July 2006. "I am letting them [U.S. military personnel] tell their own story," Patterson stated.
Patterson said his book will challenge many Americans who are "unaware" or have difficulty believing that some elements in American society would favor U.S. losing in Iraq if it means political advantage.
During his interview with INA Today.com, Patterson cited continuing Democrat Party attacks on the Iraq war effort as an example of partisan politics endangering U.S. military personnel. Referring to leftist disputes over the launching of the U.S.-led attack on the Saddam Hussein regime, Patterson rhetorically asked, "What does it say to the troops when American politicians tell U.S. soldiers that they are there because of a ruse, that the whole thing was false from the get-go"?
MEDIA BIAS COSTS SOLDIERS' LIVES
PROOF the above is true??? WHERE WAS THE MSM in covering the above stories????
Indeependent
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2013
- 73,633
- 28,506
- 2,250
You think the Military will bite the hand that pays it's bills?
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #24
"Some troops believe that distorted media reporting is a greater threat to their personal safety than direct enemy attack, because the message the media give to the public encourages terror gangs to redouble their efforts, Patterson told INA Today.
AGAIN the troops understand this and it is proven by this HARVARD STUDY!!!
This Harvard study found here THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT"
asked: "Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The short answer is YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy
research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
STUDY ABSTRACT
Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity? Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war. (wouldn't you conclude the next president accusing the US military of methodically and systematically air raiding villages killing civilians.. dissent???) We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent attacks increases by 5-10 percent.
When the troops read these comments what was their response to being called "KILLERS" Civilian Killers... Terrorists???
What do you think the barbarians thought of the below statements? Did they disagree? HELL NO THEY as the study shows were ENCOURAGED!
Senator Kerry (now Secretary of State) (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the
dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama (Now President) said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
AGAIN the troops understand this and it is proven by this HARVARD STUDY!!!
This Harvard study found here THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT"
asked: "Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The short answer is YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy
research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
STUDY ABSTRACT
Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity? Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war. (wouldn't you conclude the next president accusing the US military of methodically and systematically air raiding villages killing civilians.. dissent???) We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent attacks increases by 5-10 percent.
When the troops read these comments what was their response to being called "KILLERS" Civilian Killers... Terrorists???
What do you think the barbarians thought of the below statements? Did they disagree? HELL NO THEY as the study shows were ENCOURAGED!
Senator Kerry (now Secretary of State) (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the
dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama (Now President) said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
Iraq was lost when Dubya decided we didn't need a plan for victory. Just go in and do what your "gut" says is right.
The mainstream media and politicians of both stripes believed the faulty intel. America's media acted like cheerleaders the whole run-up to the war instead of questioning what it was we were going to do exactly once we got there.
Iraq was lost because Dubya and his administration disbanded the Iraqi military instead of paying them to secure their own country. That was the recommendation from Colin Powell and the neo-cons ignored it.
We lost because we had a bunch of chickenhawks conducting the war and ignoring all good advice on strategic moves we should have made but never did.
Neo-cons went in there and gave Shias the power and now we're seeing the Sunnis take it back.
Nation-building in a country that should be divided in three is pointless.
Going along with Republicans who say we should interfere within a civil war and take sides is the wrong thing to do. Been there done that. It fails every time.
The blame is on the people who went in and conducted this war about as poorly as any war in American history. Trying to blame the media or blaming Obama for rightly getting the fuck out of there is simply a diversion by people who don't want to have to take any responsibility for supporting the stupidest war in our history. They wanted to go in there more badly than anyone, convinced us to go along with it, then lost the war and lost our support when we realized they decided thinking and planning weren't important.
The mainstream media and politicians of both stripes believed the faulty intel. America's media acted like cheerleaders the whole run-up to the war instead of questioning what it was we were going to do exactly once we got there.
Iraq was lost because Dubya and his administration disbanded the Iraqi military instead of paying them to secure their own country. That was the recommendation from Colin Powell and the neo-cons ignored it.
We lost because we had a bunch of chickenhawks conducting the war and ignoring all good advice on strategic moves we should have made but never did.
Neo-cons went in there and gave Shias the power and now we're seeing the Sunnis take it back.
Nation-building in a country that should be divided in three is pointless.
Going along with Republicans who say we should interfere within a civil war and take sides is the wrong thing to do. Been there done that. It fails every time.
The blame is on the people who went in and conducted this war about as poorly as any war in American history. Trying to blame the media or blaming Obama for rightly getting the fuck out of there is simply a diversion by people who don't want to have to take any responsibility for supporting the stupidest war in our history. They wanted to go in there more badly than anyone, convinced us to go along with it, then lost the war and lost our support when we realized they decided thinking and planning weren't important.
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #26
I thought the MSM had too few viewers, even back then, to influence anything.
Influenced the barbarians!!!
Are you that totally naive about what common sense dictates i.e. crapping on your own soldiers,i.e. calling them "killers," terrorists", is MUSIC to the barbarians!
This Harvard study found here THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT"
asked: "Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The short answer is YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy
research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
STUDY ABSTRACT
Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity? Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an emboldenment effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war. (wouldn't you conclude the next president accusing the US military of methodically and systematically air raiding villages killing civilians.. dissent???) We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent attacks increases by 5-10 percent.
Senator Kerry (now Secretary of State) (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the
dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama (Now President) said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #27
Iraq was lost the moment we invaded unprovoked.
"UNPROVOKED"???
HEY dummy! Did you know the 1991 Desert storm conflict WAS NEVER OVER?>???
The 1991 CEASE FIRE meant no more firing by either side! IT SAID If YOU Iraq continue your murderous invasions and destructions the WAR IS BACK ON!
Dummy! YOU never knew that did you?
The "CEASE FIRE" was just that. It meant if either party of the "Cease Fire" abrogated the "1991 Cease Fire" there no longer was a "CEASE FIRE" and the war would continue.
UNITED NATIONS The United States gave its official reasons for Liberating Iraq to the U.N. Security Council late Thursday, saying Baghdad had broken a cease-fire resolution adopted after the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
Britain and Australia, two other nations in the U.S.-led coalition, wrote similar, shorter, letters to the 15-member council. None of the letters mentioned "regime change," an aim of the invasion but never authorized in any council resolution.
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #28
OH and tell me WHY these Democrats wanted Saddam removed???
YOU idiots that claim Iraq did NOTHING READ what YOUR fellow Democrats pleaded for! Begged for!
"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.
YOU idiots that claim Iraq did NOTHING READ what YOUR fellow Democrats pleaded for! Begged for!
"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #29
I really don't understand. Truly..am perplexed!
These are obvious statements made by Democrats BEFORE Bush was President!
Hell Clinton dumped
"Between 1999 and 2001, the U.S. and British-led air forces in Iraq dropped 1.3 million pounds of bombs in response to purported violations of the no-fly zones and anti-aircraft fire from Saddam Hussein."
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
DID YOU idiots NOT know this?? Why was it OK for Clinton but not Bush??? POLITICS trump principles!
These are obvious statements made by Democrats BEFORE Bush was President!
Hell Clinton dumped
"Between 1999 and 2001, the U.S. and British-led air forces in Iraq dropped 1.3 million pounds of bombs in response to purported violations of the no-fly zones and anti-aircraft fire from Saddam Hussein."
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
DID YOU idiots NOT know this?? Why was it OK for Clinton but not Bush??? POLITICS trump principles!
Mojo2
Gold Member
- Oct 28, 2013
- 6,210
- 1,026
- 190
There will never be any winning by the USA as long as the USA MSM and politicians work against our military!
The Liberation of Iraq was over in May 2003.
90% of Americans as well as the below Democrats wanted Saddam removed!
And he was and today 1.3 million children that would have been starved are still alive!
"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.
BUT with IDIOTS like exemplified BY THESE POLITICIANS that wanted to see the USA FAIL in Iraq helping the terrorists as a Harvard study showed, the liberation dragged on and the permanent force needed to prevent what is happening now was removed!
THESE IDIOTS made these statements and these statements EMBOLDENED! Encouraged! Recruited more terrorists until now today
Iraq will FALL because of the MSM and these idiots constantly accusing the USA of being the bad guys!
U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,
This told the terrorists they were justified to put bombs on little kids who when handed candy by US troops blew themselves up.. because
after all U.S. congress man said the troops killed innocent people.. SO that was OK to blow them and the little kids up!
SICK..
Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
For once you idiot defenders of these statements TELL ME.. do you think ALL American troops are terrorists?
If so then you like the terrorists think ALL Americans are worse then the terrorists right? Go ahead admit it! The SoS said so! US troops are terrorists!
Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.
and of course all you mindless uninformed can't imagine what the enemy would use to kill thousands and their justification... Durbin and other
USA congress members telling the enemy ..HEY YOU GUYS are justified!
Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
Now this guy is the Commander-in-Chief over all the military. Do you think the military is very happy to salute a CIC who thinks that our
military methodically "air-raiding villages and killing civilians"?
How can ANY American respect the above traitors and YET millions of Americans either didn't care their President called our troops civilian killers!
Or they agree!
So tell me you Obama supporters... DO YOU AGREE with the above statements?
AND don't give me that "context" crap! The terrorists don't use it in context so either these idiots were too stupid their comments would be used
which should mean they are totally inept to be MY representative OR the did it on purpose!
Either way these are stupid, vile people that hate our military.
CONTEXT MY A...! Terrorists didn't care about "context! They loved to hear USA traitor politicians TRASHING our troops!
AND the MSM blew it completely out of proportion as they always do!
You make good points!
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,520
- 2,165
- Banned
- #32
healthmyths spread the neo-con echo chamber version that excuses their failures.
The rest of America knows better.
The rest of America knows better.
1776
Anti-Liberal
It's a waste of time explaining this to the inbred liberals and losertarians....
Indeependent
Diamond Member
- Nov 19, 2013
- 73,633
- 28,506
- 2,250
Iraq was lost the moment we invaded unprovoked.
"UNPROVOKED"???
HEY dummy! Did you know the 1991 Desert storm conflict WAS NEVER OVER?>???
The 1991 CEASE FIRE meant no more firing by either side! IT SAID If YOU Iraq continue your murderous invasions and destructions the WAR IS BACK ON!
Dummy! YOU never knew that did you?
The "CEASE FIRE" was just that. It meant if either party of the "Cease Fire" abrogated the "1991 Cease Fire" there no longer was a "CEASE FIRE" and the war would continue.
UNITED NATIONS The United States gave its official reasons for Liberating Iraq to the U.N. Security Council late Thursday, saying Baghdad had broken a cease-fire resolution adopted after the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
Britain and Australia, two other nations in the U.S.-led coalition, wrote similar, shorter, letters to the 15-member council. None of the letters mentioned "regime change," an aim of the invasion but never authorized in any council resolution.
Follow the money.
Saudi Arabia financed the terrorists but owned GW's testicles.
Sadam was a scumbag but so are the Oil Kings in SA.
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #35
I really don't understand why those 32 democrat quotes, the FACT of the 1991 CEASE FIRE was broken many times, and the MSM totally biased
encouragement of the barbarians ISN"T recognized by more people!
Iraq is going down the drain.
The MSM the primary contributor as most of the military will agree..
YOU can't encourage the enemy by making statements the enemy loves to hear!
The enemy doesn't care the context!
During WWI/WWII THERE were NEVER the biased reporting as there has been in Vietnam/Iraq!
Primarily because during WWI/WWII the MSM was smart enough to know Americans were the good guys!
Today many idiots on this forum think AMERICA is the bad guy!
The MSM blows out of proportion the losses in Vietnam/Iraq totally helping the enemy!
"Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media's complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened "convinced him America's resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi's grasp," Mr. de Borchgrave said.
Patterson noted that the troops are disturbed that positive developments, including the passage of an democratic Iraqi constitution - the first such event in that nation's 5,000 year history -- receive little attention, and are never permitted to disturb an otherwise dismal image painted by the established media journalists.
Al Qaeda carefully watches and reacts to U.S. public opinion, and considers media image an extremely important aspect of their military effort, Patterson told INA Today.
The use and manipulation of the established U.S. media has been a major tool of guerrilla efforts directed against America since the Vietnam war. Successful manipulation of the media is an essential part of any "peoples war," and there are reports that Vietnamese military and governmental authorities have passed along their experience in media-driven guerrilla warfare to Islamic terror groups.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
encouragement of the barbarians ISN"T recognized by more people!
Iraq is going down the drain.
The MSM the primary contributor as most of the military will agree..
YOU can't encourage the enemy by making statements the enemy loves to hear!
The enemy doesn't care the context!
During WWI/WWII THERE were NEVER the biased reporting as there has been in Vietnam/Iraq!
Primarily because during WWI/WWII the MSM was smart enough to know Americans were the good guys!
Today many idiots on this forum think AMERICA is the bad guy!
The MSM blows out of proportion the losses in Vietnam/Iraq totally helping the enemy!
"Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media's complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened "convinced him America's resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi's grasp," Mr. de Borchgrave said.
Patterson noted that the troops are disturbed that positive developments, including the passage of an democratic Iraqi constitution - the first such event in that nation's 5,000 year history -- receive little attention, and are never permitted to disturb an otherwise dismal image painted by the established media journalists.
Al Qaeda carefully watches and reacts to U.S. public opinion, and considers media image an extremely important aspect of their military effort, Patterson told INA Today.
The use and manipulation of the established U.S. media has been a major tool of guerrilla efforts directed against America since the Vietnam war. Successful manipulation of the media is an essential part of any "peoples war," and there are reports that Vietnamese military and governmental authorities have passed along their experience in media-driven guerrilla warfare to Islamic terror groups.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
Mojo2
Gold Member
- Oct 28, 2013
- 6,210
- 1,026
- 190
Iraq was lost before it was started. Let's mush on.
Wrong.
Just as the CONVENTIONAL wisdom was that the sound barrier was an actual 'wall' in the sky which would prevent flying faster than the speed of sound...
Just as the CONVENTIONAL wisdom was that a helicopter couldn't fly because it is, in essence, a machine trying to beat the air into submission...
So is your conventional wisdom wrong about Iraq being lost before it started.
However, given the number of jizzsocks who believe it was lost before it began, then yes it was already lost.
But we have been winning it at various times.
C_Clayton_Jones
Diamond Member
Iraq was lost because of the Mainstream Media ...
Nonsense.
Iraq was lost the day GWB began his unwarranted, illegal invasion.
healthmyths
Platinum Member
- Sep 19, 2011
- 29,022
- 10,516
- 900
- Thread starter
- #38
.
If we had stayed the hell out of Iraq in the first place, the media would not have mattered.
Saddam would still be providing a strategic counter-balance to Iran.
Saddam would still be providing a firewall against Al Qaeda.
Thousands of young American soldiers would still have their lives, limbs and minds.
Thousands of American families would still have their loved ones.
A trillion or so American dollars would have been saved.
I'm no fan of the media, but this should not have happened.
.
DUMMY!!!! Saddam invaded Kuwait! YOU would be paying $8.00 or more per gallon today if 1991 Desert Storm didn't drive Saddam out !
FACT!
Saddam agreed to the 1991 CEASE FIRE! NOTE IT WAS NOT a TREATY! IT WAS NOT a SURRENDER!
BUT A CEASE FIRE meaning if Saddam as he did broke the agreement the CEASE FIRE CEASED!!!
That is why these 32 democrat quotes are so interesting because THESE people thought it was worth while!
32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!
"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.
Please explain how YOU were so better informed then the above???
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,520
- 2,165
- Banned
- #39
.
If we had stayed the hell out of Iraq in the first place, the media would not have mattered.
Saddam would still be providing a strategic counter-balance to Iran.
Saddam would still be providing a firewall against Al Qaeda.
Thousands of young American soldiers would still have their lives, limbs and minds.
Thousands of American families would still have their loved ones.
A trillion or so American dollars would have been saved.
I'm no fan of the media, but this should not have happened.
.
DUMMY!!!! Saddam invaded Kuwait! YOU would be paying $8.00 or more per gallon today if 1991 Desert Storm didn't drive Saddam out !
FACT!
Saddam agreed to the 1991 CEASE FIRE! NOTE IT WAS NOT a TREATY! IT WAS NOT a SURRENDER!
BUT A CEASE FIRE meaning if Saddam as he did broke the agreement the CEASE FIRE CEASED!!!
That is why these 32 democrat quotes are so interesting because THESE people thought it was worth while!
32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!
"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.
Please explain how YOU were so better informed then the above???
The Democratic quotes are every bit as wrong as those of the Bush bad intelligence.
Only the UN could authorize the USA to invade because of UN resolution violations. Any Bushie or lawyer who opined that it was legal is guilty of aiding offensive war and needs to be shipped to The Hague.
I am better informed because I understand what is happening over there, and you clearly don't.
C_Clayton_Jones
Diamond Member
All of Iraq is divided into three parts.
The Kurds, the Sunni, and the Shia.
It should be split into separate countries like Yugoslavia.
Correct.
As with most other countries in the ME, Iraq was a political contrivance of the post Ottoman Era, a state made up of many nations, and it failed accordingly.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 71
- Replies
- 66
- Views
- 608
- Replies
- 93
- Views
- 868
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 245
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 114
- Views
- 611
- Replies
- 110
- Views
- 546
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8496
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 482
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-